You mean to say it’s stigmatized as a bad thing, and I’d accept that.
There’s an apple called Cosmic Crisp that has to be the worst thing I’ve seen come from the Honeycrisp variant of apple. Genuinely just awful taste and texture, like it’s got sand in it.
That being said, these are only a problem at supermarkets. Farmers markets are hard carries and don’t typically have the ‘grown for shelf life’ produce you see at your typical Walmart.
You can certainly make an argument for young kids, i.e. teaching fractions and literally how to count (counting seconds).
Teenagers? No, not really. They’ll all have phones or something to tell the time by a certain age and hopefully they know their fractions / how to count. It might as well just be digital at that point.
Purge the bowels, cleanse the soul
Idk, I don’t think they’re that blurry if we compare them to similar “conundrums” in other unethical circumstances.
Like, would you think the same of someone owning child porn? They don’t distribute it, they don’t film the children themselves, they just own the recordings. The law says they’re a criminal, but it seems like a similar ethical conundrum - no? (To be clear, I think eating meat sourced from someone who did not consent is wrong. I hope that says enough about how I feel about CP.)
How about owning the schematics for a ghost gun? You haven’t printed it, you haven’t distributed the schematic - you just own the schematic (and, for the purpose of the example, a 3d printer capable of printing the parts needed).
Seems like the answer is “it’s unethical”. Gonna need a third party to weigh in.
I feel very badly for your poor colon.
A strawman that may actually be true, given how much poison the rich have dumped into our environment.
Excuse you, that’s Wide Argentinia
You are either:
giving your cat a toxic substance
giving something with the intellectual capacity of a 3 year old weed
Both are toxic. You’re a bad person.
Ratio’d.
Not to mention, your cat has the intelligence of maybe a 3 year old. You’re sitting here arguing about whether or not it’s toxic to give weed to a cat when it has the ability to consent as much as a 3 year old does.
Enjoy whatever you enjoy, IDC - you’re a bad person for exposing your cat to the smoke, moreso that you’re doing it with the intent of getting it high whilst ignoring the potential downsides.
Testing? You expect this person to consider testing?
That’s an extra step that will realistically lead to more work! That’s outrageous, can’t have that. Just won’t do.
Then why is this hard to understand?
Do you stick your hands down your shorts to prevent the water pulling them against your skin?
These people are under the impression that secondhand smoke is sentient and immediately finds the nearest non-smokers lungs to pollute. I wouldn’t expect logic to get through to them.
I make it a point to not discuss things like this when people aren’t thinking clearly.
When you smoke a cigarette the smoke doesn’t automatically find the nearest non-smokers lungs in order to harm them. The smoke settles, and there are more than enough places far enough away from people to smoke at.
If you’re worried about secondhand smoke harming you in any context outside of smoking indoors - I’m sorry but you just aren’t thinking clearly.
How long has it been since you last swam?
Are ya’ll really confused about this?
People don’t like the things they believe to be challenged, and many people fail to recognize what is a belief and what is a fact.
It’s the problem with knowing enough to not know how little you actually do (know).